Afghanistan: British Military Personnel

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the total number of British military personnel they propose to send to Afghanistan to fulfil the United Kingdom's tasks under the NATO mission.

Lord Drayson: The deployment of UK forces to Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led international security assistance force is expected to peak at around 5,700, before reducing to around 5,000 in the autumn. As with all operational commitments, we will continue to review requirements as circumstances change.

Airports: Heathrow

Lord Trefgarne: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the tall steel tower recently constructed just outside the north-west boundary of Heathrow constitutes a hazard to aviation.

Lord Davies of Oldham: It is assumed that the Question refers to the chimney at Colnbrook Depot. I can confirm that the structure has no effect on safe flight procedures at Heathrow.

Anti-social Behaviour Orders

Lord Addington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their estimate of the proportion of people subject to anti-social behaviour orders who are in receipt of housing benefit.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The information is not held centrally in England and Wales and no such estimate has been made.
	The Northern Ireland Office and the Scottish Executive advise that this information is not collected centrally.

Aquaculture

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made of the impact of large scale aquaculture in England.

Lord Rooker: Aquaculture in England consists largely of the cultivation of trout in freshwater and bivalve molluscs (for example, oysters and mussels) in marine sites, although production is relatively small in relation to the UK as a whole and to other member states.
	Defra has sponsored projects investigating the nature and extent of the impact of aquatic contaminants (effluents, pesticides, antibiotics and hormones), arising from intensive aquaculture, on the reproduction, migration and survival of wild salmonids, as well as an investigation into the impact of non-native fish species on indigenous stocks. In addition, and related to shellfish aquaculture, the department has sponsored a research project assessing the ecological impact of using wild mussel seed in mussel culture. We have also commissioned a project which aims to develop best practice in movements of shellfish stock for aquaculture (to avoid further distribution of introduced pests).

Arms Trade

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What will be their policy and priorities at the United Nations programme of action on illicit trade in small arms review conference in July; and, in particular, whether they will press for stronger controls over arms brokers, including British ones.

Lord Triesman: The UK is working hard with many other countries to ensure a successful, forward-looking review conference that agrees ways to strengthen the UN programme of action (UNPoA) and improve efforts to tackle the scourge of illicit small arms and light weapons (SALW).
	The UK is one of a small number of states which already have brokering controls as part of their licensing process and which have implemented legislation accordingly. The UK supports the formation of a group of governmental experts as soon as possible after the review conference, under the UNPoA, to address the issue of brokering.
	The UK will also use the review conference to build support for common international guidelines for national controls on transfers of SALW and to promote the role of arms control, including SALW counter-proliferation in encouraging development.

Arms Trade

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they assess progress towards an international arms trade treaty; whether they will seek a resolution on this subject from the first committee at the United Nations General Assembly in October; and, in particular, whether they will propose the establishment of an open-ended working group on the arms trade treaty.

Lord Triesman: The Government are fully committed to securing an international treaty on the trade in all conventional arms. We are working with a range of partners to bring forward a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly first committee this autumn, which will start a formal UN process. We want to make good progress, but this must be at a pace that will take other countries with us. Our latest round of global lobbying clearly indicated that, while there is good support for the start of a UN process beginning with the formation of a group of governmental experts, there is at this stage only very limited support for moving straight to an open-ended working group. We shall continue to work closely with a wide variety of partners in the run-up to first committee.

Belfast Agreement

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many changes have been made to the legislation implementing the Belfast agreement of 1998; what were the changes; why the changes were made; and when.

Lord Rooker: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer I gave on 10 May 2006 (Official Report, col. WA 138–39).

Belfast Agreement: Release of Desmond O'Hare

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 7 June (WA 189) concerning the release of Desmond O'Hare by the Government of Ireland, whether they have made an assessment of any increased risk to individuals in Northern Ireland; and what steps they have taken to mitigate any increased risk.

Lord Rooker: I have nothing further to add to the Answer I gave on 7 June (WA 189).

Belfast: Titanic Quarter

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to support the development of the Titanic Quarter in Belfast.

Lord Rooker: We are committed to the success of the Titanic Quarter development.
	Although primarily a private sector venture, to ensure that the Government's role in the development is fully co-ordinated, a ministerial group has been established under the chairmanship of my ministerial colleague, David Cairns, supported by a group of senior officials from all interested departments, including those with responsibility for planning policy, heritage and tourism matters. This is designed to ensure that the various policy interests can be focused on the successful development of the Titanic Quarter site.

Biosphere Reserves

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to fulfil the United Kingdom's obligations under the statutory framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves, in particular subsection 3.

Lord Rooker: The Man and Biosphere (MAB) programme in the UK is overseen by a committee which was established by Defra. Defra will continue to support the committee in its work. The UKMAB committee will oversee the next 10-year periodic review required by the statutory framework for biosphere reserves and Defra will fund this review.

British Citizenship

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, with regard to paragraph 4.4 of annexe h to chapter 14 of the Home Office Nationality Instructions, a child would ipso jure be conferred British overseas citizenship under Article 6(2) of the Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order 1986 and be able to apply for a British overseas citizen passport in the following circumstances (a) his first parent is solely a British national (overseas) or became a British overseas citizen on 1 July 1997 under the Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order 1986; (b) his second parent is solely an Indian citizen by birth; (c) the child is born outside India after 3 December 2004; (d) at birth the child acquires no other citizenship or nationality; and (e) the parents have, after the birth, registered the child at an Indian consulate and the child has acquired an Indian passport.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Yes. While it would be for the Indian authorities to comment on Indian nationality law, we understand that children born outside India after 3 December 2004 will acquire only Indian citizenship if and when the birth is registered at an Indian consulate. In the circumstances described, it appears that the child would have become a British overseas citizen by virtue of Article 6(2) of the 1986 order and will be able to apply for a passport describing him as such.

British Citizenship

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 16 June (WA 43), why they make no distinction between whether the action or inaction causing the loss of the other citizenship was that of the applicant or of some other person acting on his behalf, when Section 4B(2)(c) of the British Nationality Act 1981 explicitly states that the requirement therein applies to "the person".

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Section 4B(2)(c) does not specify that the "action or inaction" that brought about the loss of the person's non-British nationality or citizenship must have been that of the person himself.

British Citizenship

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House an anonymised copy of the letter to the Lord Avebury from the Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs, Mr Ian Pearson, of 27 April (ref: 27899 and 27920, N&P ref: NTN/SUR/DB) concerning British overseas citizenship and registration as a British citizen.

Lord Triesman: An anonymised copy of the letter to the noble Lord from my honourable friend the then Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs (Ian Pearson) of 27 April, concerning British overseas citizenship and registration as a British citizen, will be placed in the Library of the House.

Common Agricultural Policy: Single Farm Payment

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What checks are being made on the cross-compliance requirements for single farm payments in England; and what action is taken if a recipient of the single farm payment is found not to be complying with these requirements (a) before a payment is made; and (b) after a payment has been made.

Lord Rooker: European legislation states that each competent control authority shall, with regard to the requirements or standards for which it is responsible, carry out checks on at least 1 per cent of all farmers submitting aid applications. It goes on to say, where the legislation applicable to the act and standards already fix minimum control rates, those rates shall in so far be applied instead of this minimum rate.
	In England, cross compliance is checked by three competent control authorities: the Veterinary Medicines Directorate, the State Veterinary Service and the Rural Payments Agency.
	The cross-compliance legislation requires reductions to be made from single payment scheme (SPS) claims when non-compliances are discovered. The legislation requires reductions to be applied in the calendar year of finding. Where the payment has not yet been made then reductions will be applied directly to the SPS claim. Where the SPS payment has already been made then recovery action will be taken.

Consular Officers: Challenges to Decisions

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To whom a person should write a letter before claim under the pre-action protocol for judicial review if he wishes to contest or challenge a decision made by a consular officer at a British diplomatic post abroad.

Lord Triesman: A person should write to Consular Directorate, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Old Admiralty Building, SW1A 2AH or to Treasury Solicitors, 1 Kemble Street, London, WC2B 4TS.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report, The Right of Access to Open Countryside, how much money was spent (a) by the agency; (b) by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; and (c) by local authorities in the period between the Countryside Agency's awareness poll in 2004 and the repeat in 2005.

Lord Rooker: The Countryside Agency's omnibus tracking survey to monitor public awareness and understanding of the Countryside Code and the right of open access commenced in August 2004. Between the first wave of the survey in August 2004, and the start of the third wave which began in August 2005, the agency's open access project expenditure, funded by Defra, totalled just under £12.4 million.
	In addition, Defra has funded national park authorities and the Planning Inspectorate to implement Part I of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. In the two financial years covered by the survey, national park authorities were allocated £1.85 million in 2004–05 and £2.875 million in 2005–06. The Planning Inspectorate was also funded £1.47 million in 2004–05 and £0.44 million in 2005–06 to deal with appeals against the inclusion of land on provisional maps and restriction appeals.
	We do not hold information on the expenditure by local highway authorities on open access between August 2004 and August 2005 in addition to those costs which are funded centrally.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report on The Right of Access to Open Countryside, when the results of the Countryside Agency's in-depth survey research on the uptake of access rights will be made available; and whether there are any plans to continue that research to cover the 2006 summer holiday period.

Lord Rooker: The Countryside Agency's four-year monitoring programme commenced in 2004–05. The pilot year has been completed with 2005–06 being the first full monitoring year. Findings from the England day visitor survey and the omnibus tracking survey will be made available later this year and we expect the results of the first years of monitoring to be made available towards the end of 2007. The monitoring programme will include the 2006 summer holiday period.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report, The Right of Access to Open Countryside, whether the quoted cost to central Government of £69 million to March 2006 includes all expenditure by the national parks, the Forestry Commission and access authorities; and, if not, how much those institutions have spent which was not funded by central government.

Lord Rooker: The figure of £69 million in the National Audit Office's report represented the total open access implementation costs from 1999 to March 2006 which were centrally funded, including national park authorities and the Forestry Commission. The National Audit Office's calculation of the total costs excluded any costs incurred by local authorities for access management work beyond those funded centrally through the Access Management Grant Scheme.
	We do not hold consolidated information on the expenditure by access authorities (local highway authorities and National Park authorities) and the Forestry Commission on open access in addition to those costs which are funded centrally.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report on The Right of Access to Open Countryside, which costs of setting up and running local access forums are funded centrally; whether these funds cover the total costs; and, if not, what are the costs met by—(a) National Park authorities; (b) the Forestry Commission; and (c) access authorities.

Lord Rooker: We have centrally funded appointing authorities (local highway authorities and National Park authorities) to carry out their duties to establish and run local access forums under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. The Act places no such duty on the Forestry Commission to establish forums.
	We do not hold information on any additional costs incurred by local highway authorities and National Park authorities in running forums beyond those costs which are centrally funded.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report on The Right of Access to Open Countryside, which body supplies open access information leaflets to tourist information centres; who decides the content of those leaflets; who pays for the printing of the leaflets; and what system is used to pass them from the printer to each tourist centre.

Lord Rooker: The Countryside Agency has a duty under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 to provide information to the public about the right of access. The agency, in consultation with key stakeholders, was responsible for producing, printing and distributing national open access information leaflets to tourist information centres. Depending on the quantity of leaflets required by the tourist information centres, they were sent either by Royal Mail or by courier service.
	Other bodies such as National Park authorities and local authorities have also produced open access information leaflets at a local level.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Coastal Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the investigative phase of the preparation for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' consultation on opening further access to the United Kingdom coastline has covered any of the problems being encountered on the rollout of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000; if so, what aspects have been examined; and what statistics on incidence have been compiled.

Lord Rooker: Both Defra and the Countryside Agency have undertaken a review of their respective responsibilities for the implementation of the new right of access to open country and registered common land under Part 1 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. The findings of the two reviews are being taken into account in developing the work on possible options to improve access to the English coast.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Coastal Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In light of the National Audit Office's report The Right of Access to Open Countryside, why it was considered reasonable to ask the board of the Countryside Agency to approve options for improving coastal access when the in-depth investigation of the four study areas did not include costings; and
	Why it was considered reasonable to ask the board of the Countryside Agency to approve options for improving coastal access when only one of the seven parts of the work programme of the Coastal Access Project Group was complete.

Lord Rooker: The Countryside Agency's (CA) board paper, which was discussed at its meeting on 25 May, summarised the results of the initial evidence, fact-finding and research work which had been undertaken to date by the CA, along with its Natural England partners English Nature and the Rural Development Service. The board was asked to agree some initial conclusions about the best way to improve access to the English coast, subject to the completion of further work.
	The Natural England partnership's final advice to Defra will include details of all the elements of the partnership's work programme and the costs of possible options. The board will look again at the options in the light of all the information available before that advice is submitted to Defra.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Coastal Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the audited overspend of £39 million in delivering the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 legislation, how the Coastal Access Project Group has financed its work to date; and how the forthcoming Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' public consultation process will be financed.

Lord Rooker: The Natural England partnership's initial evidence, fact-finding and research work has been financed from within the Countryside Agency's existing open access programme budget, with additional support from English Nature and Rural Development Service staff. Defra will finance the eventual consultation from within its departmental expenditure allocation.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Coastal Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much investigation has been done by the Coastal Access Project Group into the health and safety aspects of open coastal areas, including the threats offered by wave, wind and tide, the dangers both to people and to animals offered by cliff edges, and the costs to the emergency services of the effects of exposure and isolation.

Lord Rooker: The Countryside Agency, working with its Natural England partners English Nature and the Rural Development Service, has sought advice from the Visitor Safety in the Countryside Group, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and the Royal National Lifeboat Institution in considering possible options to improve coastal access.
	The Natural England partnership has looked at a number of visitor safety and risk management issues including the Health and Safety at Work Act, the Occupiers' Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984 and examples of existing good practice including the Visitor Safety in the Countryside Group's guidance Managing Visitor Safety in the Countryside: principles and practice; RoSPA's Safety on beaches operational guidelines; the RNLI's A guide to beach safety signs, flags and symbols, and safety guidance produced by the south-west coast path team in partnership with local authorities and safety organisations.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Coastal Access

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report The Right of Access to Open Countryside, whether they plan that any future projects costing over £10 million to open coastal access will be pilot tested even if that process delays public service agreement targets.

Lord Rooker: The Government will consider whether to pilot test any such project in the light of the final report from the Natural England partnership on ways to improve access and the outcome of public consultation.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Coastal Access

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will consider the introduction of a right of public access to coastal land and the foreshore under the provisions of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Lord Rooker: In line with the Defra five-year strategy, we are looking at ways to improve access to the English coast. We have asked the Countryside Agency, working together with its Natural England partners English Nature and the Rural Development Service, to undertake research into identifying possible options to improve access to the English coast, including a right of access under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.
	As part of this work, the Natural England partnership has been undertaking an information gathering exercise to collect data to gain a comprehensive picture of the coast and existing access provision. Advice will be submitted to Defra and will serve to inform a full public consultation paper.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000: Maps

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the National Audit Office report on The Right of Access to Open Countryside, whether they will accept the recommendation that the Countryside Agency should pilot test any work required for its 10-year review of access land maps in order to develop accurate estimates of the likely cost.

Lord Rooker: The Countryside Agency has already recognised the need for a thorough re-evaluation of its existing mapping methodology before undertaking the statutory review of the maps of open country and registered common land.
	The agency has established a mapping review project to identify the likely cost of mapping and to consider any changes to its mapping approach. The agency will consider whether to pilot test any work in advance of the review of the maps in the light of the outcomes of the mapping review project.

Court Martial: Sergeant Selman and Others

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, whether all or any of the four accused soldiers made a statement or statements under caution to the investigating police; and
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, whether any recordings made of the initial interrogation of the accused men were made; if so, whether transcripts were supplied to the prosecuting authority; and whether these transcripts are now available.

Lord Goldsmith: Guardsman McGing provided two written witness statements to the Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch (11/2/04 and 19/4/04); he was later arrested and interviewed under caution (13/5/04). Guardsman McCleary was arrested and interviewed under caution (27/4/04). Lance Corporal Cooke provided a written witness statement during which he became a suspect and was immediately arrested and interviewed under caution. (27/4/04). Colour Sergeant Selman made a written witness statement (21/3/04) and was subsequently arrested and interviewed under caution (14/5/04).
	Copies of the statements and transcripts of the interviews under caution (along with copies of the tapes) were provided to the Army Prosecuting Authority.
	Edited versions of the interviews under caution and the witness statements were read out during the trial, apart from those of Colour Sergeant Selman which, following legal argument, were excluded from evidence and did not go before the court.
	Transcripts of the evidence given to the court martial are available.

Court Martial: Sergeant Selman and Others

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, from how many of the alleged victim's compatriots the investigating police took sworn or signed statements; and
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, what arrangements were made for the interpretation and translation of any sworn and signed statements made by the compatriots of the alleged victim; and
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, whether any recordings were made of the questioning of compatriots of the alleged victim, including any caution to them as to the significance of a sworn and signed statement; if so, whether transcripts were supplied to the prosecuting authority; and whether these transcripts are now available.

Lord Goldsmith: Four Iraqis were alleged to have been made to walk into the Shatt Al Basra Canal: the deceased, Mr Hanoun and two others who appear not to have been known to Mr Hanoun and did not come forward as witnesses.
	Mr Hanoun provided an initial statement to the Royal Military Police, which was recorded in English with the aid of an interpreter. The statement had the usual declaration on it that the statement was true to the knowledge and belief of the witness and that he made it knowing that if it was tendered in evidence he would be liable for prosecution if he wilfully stated in it anything that he knew to be false or did not believe to be true. It was unclear, following evidence at the trial, whether the statement was ever read back to him before he signed it and there was no addendum at the bottom of the statement that had been signed by the interpreter to indicate that this had been done.
	The Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch (SIB) then took over the case and video interviewed Mr Hanoun, assisted by a locally employed SIB interpreter. In the UK a detailed examination of the translation took place when a written transcript of the interview was prepared (it became apparent that there were significant inaccuracies with the interpretation that had taken place at the time the interview was conducted). Further written statements were taken from Mr Hanoun with the benefit of an interpreter and this process was recorded on to tape and the translations checked.
	All recordings and videos were provided to the Army Prosecuting Authority together with transcripts. The tape recordings and video of Mr Hanoun's witness interviews were not played to the court other than very small excerpts. While a full transcript of those interviews was available and used in cross-examination it was not produced to the court.

Court Martial: Sergeant Selman and Others

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, whether any of the sworn and signed statements made to the investigating police authority by compatriots of the alleged victim and relied on by the prosecuting authority in reaching its decision to prosecute failed to be sustained at trial.

Lord Goldsmith: Mr Hanoun was called as a witness for the prosecution, he gave evidence over a number of days during the course of which he substantiated the allegations he had made and repeated the information set out in his statements that had been relied on by the prosecuting authority in reaching its decision. In addition to the material collated by the investigating team, the prosecution disclosed to the accused documentation prepared in respect of the compensation claim (made by the family of the deceased and supported by Mr Hanoun), which provided slightly different accounts that were at odds with the witness statements. Extensive cross-examination drew out the inconsistencies between the accounts that had been given and emphasised the inconsistencies that there were in Mr Hanoun's evidence.

Court Martial: Sergeant Selman and Others

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, on what evidence the prosecuting authority relied in reaching its decision to prosecute, other than statements made under caution by the accused and sworn and signed statements made by compatriots of the alleged victim.

Lord Goldsmith: In reaching its decision to prosecute the Army Prosecuting Authority gave consideration to the following:
	The evidence set out in the statements and interviews of Mr Hanoun and the deceased's father.
	The accounts provided by the accused either by way of the statements that had made or the interviews that had been undertaken.
	Statements taken from other members of the accused's section.
	Statements taken from No. 1 Platoon and No. 1 Company the Irish Guards.
	The medical evidence.
	Statements provided by the investigators.
	Expert evidence regarding the canal.
	Two experienced Queen's Counsel also separately considered the evidence and advised the Army Prosecuting Authority that there was sufficient evidence to prosecute the case. The judge advocate in the court martial himself held that there was evidence on which a properly directed jury could convict the accused by throwing out a defence submission that there was insufficient evidence for three out of the four guardsmen to proceed with the trial.

Court Martial: Sergeant Selman and Others

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the cases of Sergeant Selman and others recently acquitted at court martial, whether any communication passed directly or indirectly between the prosecuting authority and the Law Officers in connection with these cases.

Lord Goldsmith: As this was a case of manslaughter alleged to have been committed by servicemen serving in Iraq, the APA consulted the Attorney-General at the time the decision to prosecute was taken and kept him informed of the progress of the case through meetings and correspondence. The decision to prosecute was that of the APA, supported by advice of independent leading counsel. The decision to prosecute was that of the Army Prosecuting Authority supported by opinion of independent leading counsel.

Crime: Knives

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many convictions there have been for knife-related offences in each of the past five years in Northern Ireland.

Lord Rooker: Complete conviction statistics involving knives are not available, as data are not collated relating to weapons used in the commission of an offence. Table 1, however, provides the number of convictions for offences which, by their title, specify the involvement of an offensive weapon.
	Figures for the calendar years 1999 to 2003 are included, the latter being the most up-to-date available at present. Data are collated on the principal offence rule, thus only the most serious offence with which an offender is charged is included.
	
		Table 1: Number of persons convicted for offensive weapon offences 1999–2003
		
			 Offence Description 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 
			 Armed with offensive weapon withintent to commit offence 28 1 1 0 2 
			 Possessing offensive weapon in publicplace 125 117 108 143 161 
			 Possessing article with blade or pointin public place 2 7 9 17 15 
			 Selling offensive weapon 1 0 0 0 0 
			 Possessing instrument with intent tocommit offence 1 1 0 1 0 
			 Possessing offensive weapon on schoolpremises 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Possessing article with blade or pointon school premises 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Total 157 126 118 161 179

Criminal Assets

Lord Lawson of Blaby: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the remarks by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 13 December 2000 (Official Report, col. 1361) on the review on when criminal assets should be frozen when the review was completed; what its main conclusions were; and whether they will place a copy of the review in the Library of the House.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The relevant criminal legislation to which Lord Bassam of Brighton referred was reviewed as part of the Proceeds of Crime—Consultation on Draft Legislation which was published and a copy placed in the House Library in March 2001 (Command Paper 5066). New and strengthened powers on the restraint and recovery of criminal assets were subsequently introduced in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
	Under the Act, suspected criminal assets can be restrained at the point of commencement of a police or other law enforcement investigation rather than at point of charge. This measure helps to prevent the potential dissipation of assets. In the international context, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order will help facilitate the repatriation of stolen assets, in response to a request from an overseas authority, by enabling assets situated in England and Wales to be restrained at an early stage. The order came into effect on 1 January and makes similar provisions for Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Diabetes

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many health boards in Northern Ireland deliver retinal screening services for people with diabetes; and what has been the percentage in each board area of people with diabetes who were screened between April 2005 and March 2006.

Lord Rooker: All four health boards currently provide retinal screening services for people with diabetes through a range of health professionals including hospital ophthalmologists, diabetologists, GPs, optometrists and the diabetic retinopathy screening service (DRSS). Using retinal digital photography, the DRSS is currently being extended to include all people with diabetes from age 12.
	The following table shows the number of people with diabetes in each health and social services board area and the number and percentage in each board area who received retinal screening between 1 January 2005 and 31 March 2006 (1 April 2005–31 March 2006 for the Western Board).
	
		
			 Health Board ofresidence Number* of people with diabetes (aged 16 years and over) registered in 2005–06 Number (percentage) that received retinal screening (aged 12 years and over) 
			 Northern 13,260 11,044 (83.3) 
			 Eastern 22,656 18,469 (81.5) 
			 Southern 10,175 7,919 (77.8) 
			 Western 8,715 5,972 (68.5) 
		
	
	Source:
	Health and Social Service Boards.
	* Note: The number of people with diabetes are those known cases, aged 16 years and over, registered in primary care.
	Retinal screening includes people with diabetes who have been screened using digital retinal photography by the DRSS and those who have had their retinas examined by other methods.
	The number of people with diabetes who received retinal screening is available only for 1 January 2005–31 March 2006 period for the Eastern, Southern and Northern Health Boards. Western Board figures represent those that were screened between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2006.

Diabetes: Police Recruitment

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the policy of the Police Service of Northern Ireland regarding applicants with insulin-treated diabetes who seek recruitment to the service.

Lord Rooker: I am advised by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) that the outsourced recruitment providers, the Consensia Partnership, apply the National Recruitment Standards—Medical Standards for Police Recruitment, Home Office Circular 59/2004 for the assessment of all candidates.
	This guidance specifically takes account of the employment provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, the application of which applied to police officers from 1 October 2004. As a result it is unlawful to exclude candidates automatically on the basis of a medical condition or disability.
	While the employment decisions are for the PSNI, the recruitment assessment process for those with insulin-treated diabetes ensures that each case is considered individually and on its own merits. This includes a thorough medical assessment process, including seeking medical reports from the individual's diabetic specialist. Thereafter, a report is forwarded with recommendations to the PSNI.
	At that stage the PSNI considers each case at a PSNI disability panel before coming to a decision regarding employability. In particular, account is taken of possible adjustments that could be reasonably introduced by PSNI to assist the person undertaking the role of a police constable.

Ethnicity

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How, for legal purposes, they define an individual's ethnicity.

Baroness Andrews: 2 AC 548 HL that reference to "ethnic origins" in the context of the 1976 Act means a segment of the population distinguished from others by a combination of shared customs, beliefs, traditions and characteristics, derived from a common or presumed common past, sufficient to give them an historically determined social identity in their own eyes and in the eyes of others, even if there was not, in biological terms, a common racial stock. We believe the "ethnicity" of an individual would be similarly determined.

EU: National Veto

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will resist the European Commission's proposal to abolish the veto over justice and home affairs legislation and move it into the first pillar of the treaties.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The European Commission has indicated that it will present a proposal on the basis of Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union to change decision-making arrangements in police and judicial matters. It announced this in its communication entitled A Citizens' Agenda: Delivering Results for Europe, published on 10 May 2006, but at present there is no formal proposal. Under the current EU treaty framework, co-operation on police and judicial matters is agreed by unanimity. That could change to qualified majority voting only if all member states, including the UK, agree. Police and judicial co-operation affects core areas of national responsibility and we would have to consider very carefully the risks and benefits and the overall impact of any proposal.

Fair Trade

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any of the Northern Ireland departments have adopted the concept of fair trade in their purchasing policy; and, if some have not, when they will adopt such a policy.

Lord Rooker: Northern Ireland procurement policy applies to all government departments. The Northern Ireland Procurement Board, in developing this policy, approved, at its meeting in October 2005, the issue of a policy guidance note on the procurement of fair trade products in Northern Ireland departments including the mandatory use of such products in appropriate circumstances.
	This approach is in line with a commitment previously given by a former Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland with responsibility for finance and personnel (Ian Pearson), as chairman of the procurement board, that fair trade products would be used whenever possible and in relation to government-funded hospitality in particular.
	A copy of the procurement guidance note has been placed in the Library.

Family Breakdown

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Office for National Statistics publishes invoices and neighbourhood statistics for seven of the eight indicators of deprivation that have been adopted by the Social Exclusion Unit, but not for the eighth indicator; namely, family breakdown.

Baroness Andrews: Statistics on family breakdown are currently not available at neighbourhood level and as the index includes only indicators that measure a major feature of deprivation (that is, not conditions experienced by a small number of people or areas), it is unlikely that a measure of family breakdown would be suitable for inclusion in the index.

Family Breakdown

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether in future they intend to publish figures for marriage, divorce and incidence of domestic violence by neighbourhood so that changes in the levels of deprivation following family breakdown can be monitored.

Baroness Andrews: It is not possible to produce reliable figures for marriage and divorce at the neighbourhood level. Figures for marriage are published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) at the registration district (similar to local authority district) level in which they occurred.

Forced Marriages

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Triesman on 20 June (WA 73–4), what is the best practice and what are the guidelines for tackling the problem of forced and child marriages; and what practical support they will give forced marriage victims who bring private prosecutions.

Lord Triesman: The Forced Marriage Unit sees best practice on forced marriage as focusing on prevention, protection and service provision to victims of forced marriage, while maintaining confidentiality where possible. The Forced Marriage Unit works within guidelines for domestic violence and child protection and in cases involving children or young people we work closely with social care services. We have produced specific guidelines on handling forced marriage cases for police, social care services and education professionals, to which the noble Lord might wish to refer, and are developing guidance for health professionals. These are available on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website at www.fco.gov.uk/forcedmarriage. Our best practice in handling casework is supported by work to raise awareness and develop appropriate policies and is underpinned by continuous programmes of research.
	In cases where an individual wishes to pursue a criminal prosecution, we work closely with police, the Crown Prosecution Service and voluntary organisations to provide the support and protection needed. Many police forces do not currently collect statistics of prosecutions related to forced marriage cases, but over the past 12 months the Metropolitan Police have recorded 101 allegations of crimes relating to forced marriage.

Government Departments: Special Advisers

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 14 June (WA 29), whether it is their policy to withhold information from the public regarding (a) the number of assistants currently employed for special advisers to Ministers; (b) the government departments in which they are employed; and (c) the nature of their services; and, if not, whether they will publish that information.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: Paragraph 11 of the Code of Conduct for Special Advisers states that in order to enable special advisers to work effectively, departments may allocate permanent civil servants to provide support of a non-political nature.
	Information on the number of civil servants employed to provide such support is not held centrally.

Guantanamo Bay

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will launch an international campaign, through the United Nations, the G8, the European Union and international human rights bodies, to persuade the Government of the United States to close down Guantanamo Bay and release the detainees or send them for trial.

Lord Triesman: We have made it clear on a number of occasions that we regard the circumstances under which detainees continue to be held at Guantanamo Bay as unacceptable. As my right honourable friend the Prime Minister has said, Guantanamo should be closed.
	The US Government are well aware of our views and have acknowledged the calls made by us and others. As the noble Lord will know, President Bush has himself recently said that he would like to end Guantanamo, adding:
	"One of the things we will do is, we will send people back to their home countries. We've got about 400 people there left: 200 have been sent back; 400 are there, mainly from Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Yemen. There are some who need to be tried in US courts . . . And I'm waiting for the Supreme Court of the United States to determine the proper venue in which these people can be tried".

Gulf War: Pensions

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Ministry of Defence did not respond until 5 June 2006 to the letter from the president of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal, dated 5 April, regarding the re-interpretations and tampering by the department in its handling of the tribunal's decision in the case of Gulf War veteran Mark McGreevy's war pension appeal.

Lord Drayson: The Ministry of Defence sought to provide the president of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal with a full and helpful reply to the points he had raised in his letter. In doing so, the Ministry of Defence needed to re-examine the terms of the notification letters sent to Mr McGreevy and also took the opportunity to explain the department's position on certain issues concerning the application of Gulf War syndrome as an umbrella term. This took longer than expected and in the letter dated 5 June, the Ministry of Defence apologised to the president for the delay in providing a response to his letter. A copy of Dr Concannon's letter and the response from the Ministry of Defence were placed in the Library of the House in response to the noble Lord's earlier Questions (Official Report, col. WA 126).

Gulf War: Pensions

Lord Roberts of Conwy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, before the responses by the Lord Drayson to the Lord Morris of Manchester's Starred Question on 8 June (HL Deb, cols. 1379–84), Ministers had seen the letter from the president of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal, dated 5 April, referring to the "re-interpretation" and "tampering" by the department in its handling of the tribunal's decision in the case of Gulf War veteran Mark McGreevy's war pension appeal.

Lord Drayson: While the letter from the president of the Pensions Appeal Tribunals had not been seen by Defence Ministers, Ministers were briefed on it in preparation for the Starred Question on 8 June. The president's letter, addressed to the chief executive of the Veterans Agency, concerned matters of policy and was therefore forwarded to the appropriate Ministry of Defence directorate for reply. Copies of the president's letter and the response from the Ministry of Defence were placed in the Library of the House in response to an earlier Question from the noble Lord, Lord Morris of Manchester (Official Report, col. WA 126).

Housing: Affordable Homes

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have plans to remove the ability of developers to make multiple minor changes to plans for dwellings intended as affordable homes.

Baroness Andrews: When a developer wishes to change some aspect of a planning application after it has been submitted, it is for the local planning authority to decide whether the amendment would alter the proposal so significantly that it should insist on a fresh application, or whether to accept a minor amendment and record it on the planning register. In the latter circumstance, the authority would also need to assess whether it should carry out a further round of publicity to let third parties know about the change.
	Once full permission has been granted, the developer would have to make another application for approval of multiple changes to plans.

Housing: Home Information Packs

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What estimates they have made of the number of surveyors required for the introduction of home information packs in (a) the first year, and (b) the second year of implementation.

Baroness Andrews: It is estimated that the number of home inspectors required in England and Wales by 1 June 2007 will be between 5,000 and 7,400. The replacement rate for inspectors is estimated to be around 10 per cent per year.

Housing: Home Information Packs

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many persons are being trained to carry out surveys for home information packs; and whether they have any plans to increase this number.

Baroness Andrews: As of 31 May 2006, more than 4,400 home inspectors are in the process of being trained and 232 have completed their training. We expect the number of persons entering training and the number completing their qualifications to increase now that the regulations confirming the content of the home information pack have been laid before Parliament. A further prospective awarding body (City and Guilds) has indicated that it expects to be operational in September 2006.

Housing: Market Renewal

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the 2005–06 out-turn for each housing market renewal pathfinder area; and what are the 2006–07 and 2007–08 allocations.

Baroness Andrews: The table below shows the total sums claimed by each of the pathfinders in 2005–06, and sums announced for eight of the nine housing market renewal pathfinders for 2006–07 and 2007–08. Additional funding decisions have not yet been made for Hull and East Riding. All figures are rounded to one decimal place.
	
		
			 Pathfinder Outturn for 2005–06(£m) Fundingawarded for 2006–07(£m) Funding awarded for 2007–08 (£m) (subject to availability of resources) 
			 UrbanLiving (Birmingham Sandwell) 30.0 12.0 Not yet decided 
			 Elevate East Lancashire 43.2 46.0 48.9 
			 Gateway (Hull and East Riding)* 8.7 6.6 1 
			 Manchester Salford 51.2 52.1 53.9 
			 NewHeartlands (Merseyside) 51.7 46.8 50.9 
			 Bridging Newcastle Gateshead 31.9 23.0 41.0 
			 Renew North Staffordshire 19.3 29.0 38.5 
			 Partners in Action (Oldham-Rochdale) 30.7 30.0 37.5 
			 Transform South Yorkshire 36.7 40.2 49.8 
			 Total 303.2 285.7 321.5 
		
	
	*Funding decisions not yet determined

Housing: Market Renewal

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the 2006–07 funding allocations for the Elevate East Lancashire housing market renewal pathfinder and for each local authority within the pathfinder will be confirmed.

Baroness Andrews: The Government announced a total of £46 million new funding for 2006–07 for the Elevate East Lancashire housing market renewal pathfinder on 24 March 2006. This is subject to agreement between the Department for Communities and Local Government and the pathfinder on the terms of the funding agreement. Allocations to particular projects are locally determined by the pathfinder partnership, which includes representatives from the constituent local authorities.

Housing: Market Renewal

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they remain committed to the housing market renewal programmes in the nine pathfinder areas and to the 15-year programme of investment in them.

Baroness Andrews: The Government have demonstrated their commitment by recently announcing almost £650 million of funding in 2006–08 for eight pathfinders and other market renewal areas. We are currently discussing proposals with the ninth pathfinder.
	There has been strong improvement in markets since the programme began, so we anticipate that over time we will be able to see greater private investment leading renewal. This will occur at a different pace in different places and our long-term commitments to deliver renewed housing markets remains.

Inward Investment

Lord Barnett: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many international companies have moved their headquarters from the United Kingdom to the Republic of Ireland in each year since 1987.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: UK Trade & Investment does not record annually the number of international companies that have moved their headquarters from the United Kingdom to the Republic of Ireland.
	Statistical information produced externally records that four companies have moved parts of their operations from the United Kingdom to the Republic of Ireland since 1997.

Inward Investment

Lord Barnett: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many international companies have moved their headquarters into the United Kingdom in each year since 1987.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The number of international companies that have moved their headquarters into the United Kingdom since 1998–99 as recorded by UK Trade & Investment is detailed in the following table:
	
		
			 Year Headquarters 
			 1998–99 2 
			 1999–2000 4 
			 2000–01 44 
			 2001–02 31 
			 2002–03 55 
			 2003–04 66 
			 2004–05 108 
			 Total 310 
		
	
	The figures for 2002–03 to 2004–05 have been revised since the publication of UK Trade & Investment's annual inward investment reports that have been laid in the Libraries of the House.

Israel and Palestine: Funding

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why international aid and development funds for the West Bank and Gaza are not being channelled through the Office of the President of the Palestine Liberation Organisation.

Baroness Amos: On 16 June the European Council announced an internationally agreed temporary mechanism to fund Palestinians' basic needs. This temporary international mechanism will work through the Office of the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mr Abbas.
	The mechanism aims to have an initial, immediate impact on the lives of the Palestinian people by helping to ensure that healthcare continues to be provided in the Occupied Territories. Over the coming months, the mechanism will provide assistance to Palestinians in greatest need.

Israel and Palestine: Gaza

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much of the $9 billion, pledged by members of the G8 in 2005 for the development of Gaza, has so far been spent; what plans exist for further spending; and with what timetable.

Baroness Amos: At the Gleneagles summit on 7 July 2005, G8 leaders endorsed an aid package of $3 billion per year for three years to help build the Palestinian economy, if certain conditions were met. These conditions included movement and access between Israel and the Palestinian territories and a process of establishing a development plan for the Palestinian territories.
	Hamas's victory in the Palestinian Legislative Council elections in January 2006 pre-empted any implementation of the Gleneagles commitment and the context has now shifted significantly. Although the Gleneagles commitment is not off the table, many donors, including the UK, have suspended direct aid to the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority. Until Hamas meets the three principles set out in the quartet statement of 30 January (recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and acceptance of previous agreements and obligations) direct financial and technical assistance to the Palestinian Authority cannot be resumed. However, development assistance continues outside the Palestinian Authority. The EU is working urgently to set up a temporary international mechanism to meet Palestinian basic needs. Many donors, including the UK, are planning to channel money through this mechanism.

Kosovo: Courts

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will increase funding for Kosovo with a view to seeking a reduction in official corruption, an increase in the effectiveness of the courts and the speeding up of the prosecution of armed criminals.

Lord Triesman: The UK works closely with the UN mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), the Kosovo Government and other international organisations seeking to improve the judicial system and tackle organised crime and corruption.
	The UK provides around 65 police officers to UNMIK to assist with law enforcement in Kosovo and provided expertise and equipment to increase the effectiveness of the Kosovo Organised Crime Unit (now called the Directorate of Organised Crime). We have provided witness protection equipment to the local district courts in order to enable them to secure a victim's testimony and also specialist IT training for the Kosovo Police Service. In addition, the Department for International Development is working to strengthen the new Ministries of Justice and the Interior. Our contribution in supplying the witness protection equipment was recognised by Soren Jessen-Petersen, UN special representative in Kosovo, in his recent report to the UN Security Council.
	We also contribute almost 19 per cent of the funding to the EU's external assistance programme to the western Balkans—the Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation (CARDS) programme. Between 2005 and 2006, CARDS has allocated €143.5 million to Kosovo and €11.6 million is devoted to justice and home affairs issues.
	The instrument for pre-accession replaces CARDS from 2007 as the EU's financial instrument which streamlines all pre-accession assistance within a single framework. The EU has not yet reached a decision on the financial allocations for any of the countries covered by the instrument.
	The Foreign and Commonwealth Office also paid for an official from the Department for Constitutional Affairs to go to Kosovo last December to carry out an assessment on the Kosovo judicial system. The findings acknowledged progress that UNMIK has made in setting up a judicial system in Kosovo, and also highlighted the challenges that this fledgling structure still faces.
	We will continue to look for other opportunities to support the Kosovo Government.

Netherlands: Criminal Investigations

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make representations to the Government of the Netherlands to ensure that British and other non-Dutch speaking persons in the Netherlands, charged or under investigation for crimes, receive proper translation and interpretation services, access to lawyers and reasonable facilities in prison.

Lord Triesman: We take the rights of British nationals in prison overseas very seriously. Our embassy in The Hague and our consulate-general in Amsterdam are in regular contact with the Dutch law enforcement authorities, including prisons, to ensure that the human rights of prisoners are respected. If specific allegations are received about problems with translation and access to lawyers in an individual case, then we will consider raising our concern with the relevant Dutch authorities.

Norfolk Island

Lord Jones of Cheltenham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will discuss the future of the residents of Norfolk Island with the Government of Australia and with the islanders.

Lord Triesman: Norfolk Island was placed under the authority of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1914. The future of the island and its residents remains a matter for the Government of Australia to determine. We have no plans to discuss this matter with the Government of Australia.

Peace Funding: Northern Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 13 June (WA 17) concerning the definition of reconciliation for Peace II evaluation, whether they will place in the Library of the House lists of those consulted about the use of Brandon Hamber and Grainne Kelly's definition.

Lord Rooker: Consultation on the Peace II extension attracted some 500 participants and 70 written responses. Many highlighted the need for an increased focus on reconciliation. The consultation committee therefore recommended integrating the Brandon Hamber/Grainne Kelly proposals into project selection and making reconciliation count for 20 per cent of a project's overall score, not 6 per cent as previously.
	The SEUPB's consultation document, which includes a list of the members of the consultation committee, will be placed in the Library of the House.

Parliaments: Sitting Days and Costs

Viscount Tenby: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the per capita cost per Member of (a) the House of Commons; (b) the House of Lords; and (c) the European Parliament; and
	What is the annual cost of maintaining (a) the House of Commons; (b) the House of Lords; and (c) the European Parliament including (i) salaries, pensions, travelling allowances and secretarial expenses for Members; (ii) salaries, allowances and pensions and other costs of supporting staff; (iii) accommodation, including rent, operating costs and security; and (iv) all other administrative costs to parliamentary bodies and other relevant outgoings for 2005–06 and the previous three financial years; and
	What was the number of sitting days of (a) the House of Commons Chamber; (b) the House of Commons, Westminster Hall; (c) the House of Lords Chamber; (d) the House of Lords Grand Committee; and (e) the European Parliament Plenary Session in the (i) 2004–05 Session; (ii) 2005 calendar year; and (iii) 2005–06 financial year.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: Precise comparisons between the cost of the European Parliament and the Houses of Parliament are difficult. The requested information is set out below. As with last year's answers to similar questions, the House of Commons and House of Lords have provided data relating to costs on a resource basis, consistent with their resource accounts. The European Parliament has not adopted resource accounting and budgeting and all its cost figures have been presented on a cash basis.
	
		
			 Per capita cost per member(£'000s) 2005–06 unaudited provisionalfigures 
			 House of Commons (1) (2) 726 
			 House of Lords (2) 149 
		
	
	Figures for 2000–01, to 2004–05 for the House of Commons and House of Lords can be found in the relevant year's resource accounts (6) (7). European Parliament figures are available on its website (8).
	Annual Costs
	European Parliament
	The European Parliament outturn figures for calendar years 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and budget figures for 2005 and 2006 can be found on the European Parliament website (8).
	
		House of Commons -- £ millions
		
			  2005–06 provisional unaudited outturn 
			 Members salaries, pensions travel andallowances (3) 146.2 
			 Salaries and pensions for administrativestaff (4) 61.0 
			 Accommodation costs, including rent,operating costs and security 93.5 
			 Other administration costs (5) 168.1 
			 Total 468.8 
		
	
	Details of previous years' expenditure by the House of Commons can be found in the Members and administration resource accounts (6).
	
		House of Lords -- £ millions
		
			  2005–06 provisionalunaudited outturn 
			 Members expenses 15.2 
			 House of Lords staff costs 16.4 
			 Accommodation costs (2) 56.3 
			 Other administration costs 17.9 
			 Total 105.8 
		
	
	Details of previous years' expenditure by the House of Lords can be found in their resource accounts(7).
	
		Number of Sitting Days
		
			 Sitting Days 2004–05 Session CalendarYear 2005 2005–06 Financial Year 
			 European ParliamentPlenary Session (8) (9) 38 48 51.5 
			 House Of CommonsChamber 65 133 137 
			 House Of Commons,Westminster Hall 39 83 86 
			 House Of Lords Chamber 63 126 132 
			 House Of Lords, GrandCommittee 29 55 60 
		
	
	(1) The figures are calculated on the assumption that there are 659 Members.
	(2) From 2004-05 onwards the figures are based on the capital charge reducing from 6 per cent to 3.5 per cent.
	(3) The 2005 General Election saw additional Member salary costs of £5.4 million arising from the payment of resettlement grants, as well as the winding-up allowance costs of £3.5 million payable to those Members who stood down.
	(4) Higher salary costs in 2005–06 represent an increase in the employer pension contribution from 18.7 per cent to 22.6 per cent.
	(5) The other administration costs include a one-off technical accounting adjustment of £115.8 million to recognise the full pension liability following the adoption of new accounting standard FRS117.
	(6) House of Commons resource accounts can be found on its website (HC419, HC420, HC67, HC68, HC1239, HC1240) at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmhocpap.htm£resource.
	(7) House of Lords resource accounts can be found on its website (HL23, HL44, HLI 1, HL197) at www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldres.htm.
	(8) European Parliament budget information and number of members can be found on its website at www.europa.eu.int/eur-lex/budget/www/index-en.htm and www.europarl.org.uk/.
	(9) 2004 being an election year, had fewer meeting days than a normal year.

Planning: Rural Areas

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many orders enforcing planning regulations were outstanding in rural areas of England at the last date for which figures are available.

Baroness Andrews: It is local planning authorities that take enforcement action to deal with breaches of planning control. The Government do not hold this information and it could be collected only at disproportionate cost.

Prisoners: Deportation

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether all those serving custodial sentences who have been recommended for deportation by the courts are entitled to apply for political asylum on release from prison; and, if so, how long after their release they can do so.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Foreign nationals who have served custodial sentences in the UK can apply for asylum while in the UK. However, Article 33(2) of the refugee convention provides that, where an individual has been convicted of a particularly serious crime and is deemed to constitute a danger to the community, that convention does not prevent them being returned to their country of origin even if they have a well founded fear of persecution in that country. Section 72 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum 2002 provides an interpretation of Article 33(2) of the 1951 convention. Under Section 72 a "particularly serious crime" is one for which the person concerned has received a sentence of imprisonment of at least two years, or has been convicted of an offence specified by order of the Secretary of State, whatever the length of sentence imposed. An automatic presumption is made, which is rebuttal, that such a person poses a danger to the community.

Prisoners: Deportation

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, how long before the end of a sentence a prisoner can be deported; and whether these arrangements are working as intended.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The early removal scheme introduced in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides for removal up to 135 days in advance of the conditional release or parole eligibility date, with the exception of a small number of prisoners whose offence is listed in appendix 4 to Prison Service Order 6000. In the most recent Written Ministerial Statement of 23 May 2006, the Home Secretary set out the eight priority areas for management action to deliver our long-term agenda of change in radically improving the system for deporting foreign national prisoners. The eighth point covers the need for enhanced arrangements to facilitate the return of prisoners earlier in their sentence.

Prisoners: Deportation

Lord Ramsbotham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many prisoners have been recategorised from D to C in the past three months; and what proportion of these were foreign national prisoners.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The information requested is not held centrally and could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.

Prisons: Sentencing

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have issued guidance to Ministers on what constitutes an appropriate comment on prison sentences.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: No such specific guidance has been issued. Ministers act in accordance with the Ministerial Code.

Road Safety

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have made an assessment of the report by the Stockholm Environment Institute at the University of York of a detailed investigation of the Swedish "Vision Zero" road safety policy; and what benefits could be achieved by adoption of its recommendations.

Lord Davies of Oldham: No assessment has yet been made of the Stockholm Environment Institute report into the Swedish "Vision Zero" road safety policy. The Government's road safety strategy to 2010 is set out in the March 2000 White Paper Tomorrow's Roads—Safer for Everyone. While there are some similarities between the individual measures being implemented in Sweden and in the UK, there are no plans to adopt a "Vision Zero" approach here in the UK.

Schools: City Academies

Baroness Morris of Yardley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many contracts have been agreed with consultants in respect of the city academy programme by the Department for Education and Skills; at what cost; and for what purpose.

Lord Adonis: In the last full financial year, there were a total of 30 consultancy contracts. Of these, 24 were with individual consultants, some of whom were seconded headteachers or local authority staff who worked closely with individual academies, sponsors, local authorities and the department, and on the establishment and running of academies. Total expenditure was £1.9 million in 2005–06.
	The remaining six are with companies providing specialist services, including specialist procurement and legal advice, advice on TUPE and special educational needs, and on the integration of academies with Building Schools for the Future. These contracts totalled £2.8 million in 2005–06.
	These figures exclude specialist project support for individual academy projects such as architects, construction project management, etc.

Trade: ACP Countries

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What material progress they have made during trade negotiations in 2006 in securing adequate protection for African, Caribbean and Pacific countries entering the new economic partnership agreements; and what examples of progress they can provide.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Economic partnership agreement (EPA) negotiations between the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries and the European Union are in progress. It will not be possible fully to assess what protection has been secured for these countries until those negotiations are finalised by the end of 2007.
	However, on 10 April the General Affairs and External Relations Council agreed conclusions, which highlighted the need for the EPAs to be "development instruments complementary to the overall development efforts in order to eradicate poverty and to achieve the millennium development goals". These conclusions also emphasised the need for EPAs to take into account "all parties' respective political choices" and stressed the importance of the scheduled review of EPAs, as outlined in the Cotonou agreement, scheduled to take place later this year. The conclusions make clear that this review should be full and comprehensive with participation by the ACP and, as supported by the UK, it should determine whether the development needs of the ACP are being addressed.
	The UK has been instrumental in engaging other EU member states on EPAs through various fora established during our presidency of the EU; we believe that without this engagement these council conclusions may not have happened. The UK will work to ensure that the development commitments in these conclusions and set out in the Cotonou agreement are taken forward.

Trespass

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 16 May (WA 27), which sites in the United Kingdom have been designated under Sections 128 to 131 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005; and how the public are made aware that trespass on these sites carries a different offence and penalty from trespass on other similar sites.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: On 1 April 2006 a designation order made on behalf of the Secretary of State for Defence came into effect designating the following MoD sites as protected sites under Sections 128 and 129 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005: Her Majesty's Naval Base Clyde, Royal Naval Armaments Depot Coulport, Northwood Headquarters, RAF Fylingdales, RAF Menwith Hill, RAF Croughton, RAF Lakenheath, RAF Feltwell, RAF Mildenhall, RAF Brize Norton, Sea Mounting Centre Marchwood, RAF Fairford and RAF Welford. On 13 April 2006, following amendments made to Sections 128 and 129 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 by Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2006, all licensed nuclear sites also became protected sites. In addition, the Home Secretary is currently considering whether there are any additional sites which he wishes to designate under these provisions.
	It is the intention that appropriate measures, including clear signage, will be in place at all protected sites to ensure that members of the public are aware of the provisions of the offence. In addition, Section 128(4) provides that it is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he did not know, and had no reasonable cause to suspect, that the site in relation to which the offence is alleged to have been committed was a protected site.

Ulster-Scots

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements are in place for the funding of Ulster-Scots language films similar to the funding available to the Irish language sector.

Lord Rooker: The Government have no arrangements in place for the funding of Ulster-Scots language films similar to the Irish Language Broadcast Fund. The establishment of the Irish Language Broadcast Fund stems from a commitment in the Joint Declaration made by the UK and Irish Governments in April 2003. There was also a commitment to encourage support to be made available for an Ulster-Scots academy. The Government have given equal attention to both commitments and have earmarked the same level of resources for both.

Vehicle and Operator Services Agency

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Davies of Oldham on 16 June (WA 51–2), whether they have proposals to require the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency to pay the costs of unsuccessful actions which it brings against individuals or companies whom it alleges were in breach of the law.

Lord Davies of Oldham: There are currently no plans to require the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) to pay the costs of unsuccessful actions. If it is shown that a case should not have been brought before the court, then the court can award costs directly against VOSA.

Water Supply: Consumption

Lord Hanningfield: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the total consumption of water in cubic metres, including a breakdown of consumption per occupant, in the headquarters of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in each of the past 10 years.

Lord Triesman: Records on water consumption are not held for the financial years prior to 1999–2000.
	Water consumption for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's two London Offices, the Old Admiralty Building and King Charles Street, in the financial years since 1999–2000 is as follows.
	
		
			 Financial Year Water consumption per person(cubic metres) per year 
			 1999–2000 12.5 
			 2000–01 11.0 
			 2001–02 Meter errors invalidated data 
			 2002–03 8.42 
			 2003–04 8.1 
			 2004–05 7.8 
			 2005–06 Data on this are still being finalised

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the religious background of Waterways Ireland employees who work in Northern Ireland in each grade.

Lord Rooker: I refer the noble Lord to my Answer of 7 June 2006 (WA 202).
	At the reporting date in 2005, there were 25 management and professional staff, 47 administrative and secretarial staff and 15 industrial staff in Waterways Ireland.
	The perceived religious affiliation of staff has not been given due to the small numbers involved, in order to protect the confidentiality of the information held.

Women's Health: Obstetric Fistulae

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking with their international partners to tackle vesico-vaginal fistula.

Baroness Amos: The cornerstone of preventing obstetric fistulae is prompt access to good quality healthcare when needed. DfID is committed to helping countries expand access to healthcare, including family planning, safe abortion services, antenatal and obstetric services.
	DfID is the only major bilateral donor to have a strategy focused on reducing maternal mortality. Copies of the first progress report on the strategy have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The effects of fistula can be devastating for the lives of girls and women, whose babies often die. Rendered incontinent, they are often rejected by their husbands, thrown out of their homes and excluded from community life. DfID is therefore committed to promoting the rights of girls and women, particularly their sexual and reproductive rights. DfID is also committed to the elimination of harmful practices such as early marriage and female genital mutilation which can significantly increase the risk of fistula.
	DfID bilateral expenditure on maternal and reproductive health has increased by 42 per cent over the past three years to £243 million. DfID targets some funding through NGOs to tackle obstetric fistula. For example, DfID has provided a grant of £558,000 to the Engender Health and Women's Dignity Project to combat obstetric fistula in Tanzania and Uganda, and £140,000 to the Obstetric Fistula in Africa Project. To complement our country-level support, DfID channels funds through the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). DfID provides £20 million a year core funding and in 2004, £10 million specifically for reproductive health supplies. DfID also provides an annual contribution of £19 million to the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and £12.5 million to the World Health Organisation (WHO), whose programmes support work on women's empowerment and maternal and reproductive health.
	On 27 June 2006, the UNFPA will be launching a high-profile media campaign on obstetric fistula. I will attend this event on behalf of the Secretary of State for International Development.
	The UNFPA has chosen to locate the campaign in the UK to maximise the political commitment of the UK to addressing the millennium development goal targeted at improving maternal health.

World Cup: Policing

Lord Ouseley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What resources are being deployed to ensure that football supporters travelling to the World Cup tournament in Germany will do so lawfully and securely; and how much this will cost; and
	What collaborative arrangements are in place to prevent fans from travelling to the football World Cup in Germany who are known troublemakers or have banning orders restricting their attendance.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: There is close liaison with the German Government, police and civil authorities at federal and local levels covering governmental, police, judicial and other co-operation. Detailed arrangements are in place to minimise the risk of significant English football disorder during the World Cup. The cornerstone of this is tough football banning order legislation which prevents known-risk fans leaving England and Wales during the tournament.
	The World Cup control period begins on 30 May and continues until 9 July. All individuals subject to a football banning order will be required to report to a designated police station and surrender their passport on 30 May. Thereafter, they will be required to report on the day of each England game to ensure they have not attempted to travel.
	Compliance will also be enforced through an extensive police ports operation, which will take place at air, rail and sea ports during the World Cup control period. It is rare for individuals to breach the conditions of their banning orders and no banning order subject attempted to travel to Euro 2004. During a control period if the police decide that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the individual does pose a risk to public order they can prevent the individual travelling. This prompts a football banning order court hearing within 24 hours. During the Euro 2004 control period, police at ports used this procedure to serve notices which resulted in the imposition of 55 banning orders.
	An English police delegation will be deployed in Germany to support police operations in venue cities and other locations where English fans gather. This delegation includes police spotters, intelligence and liaison officers. The English police working in venue cities will include a small number of uniformed officers deployed to provide reassurance to England fans and liaise between fans and host police. They will not have police powers.
	In addition, uniformed English police officers with powers will work with the Federal Police in airports, trains and railway stations. This will include British Transport Police officers experienced in policing travelling English football fans. Large numbers of England fans will travel to Germany via transit countries. To ensure continuity of police information and support, English police liaison teams will be based in a number of transit countries, including the Netherlands, Czech Republic, Belgium, France, Poland, Denmark, Austria and Switzerland.
	No detailed costings are available at present. Much will depend on the length of time the England team is in the tournament.